design the perfect murder (or some other misdeed) via input on an internet forum?

If membership was asked to help design a perfect crime and somewhere in the world someone picked up on it and followed through, would the Forum be held wholly, partially or not liable of contributing to it? Could an individual on the forum be held solely responsible if their idea(s) was/were used? Could they be charged?

Surely crime novels, TV and movies have had their plots copied in the real world yet I don't recall much protest or criminal proceedings against publishers and production companies. WikiLeaks is about all I can think of at the moment that's reasonably close.

Can you still design a bomb on the internet? Has that been outlawed? Does it matter what part of the world you're in? Depending where I am, it seems I can get in more trouble by denouncing religion than printing bomb building instructions.

Human rights or the constitutional right of a citizen, freedoms and liberties granted, do they supersede any wrongdoing?

How closely is internet traffic monitored by police authorities for potential crime or to solve crimes? Are there things police can do that most people aren't aware of or would it be illegal to reveal their methods?

All that belongs to human understanding, in this deep ignorance and obscurity, is to be skeptical, or at least cautious; and not to admit of any hypothesis, whatsoever; much less, of any which is supported by no appearance of probability...Hume

I don't know what your location is, but here it is a crime. Just planning a crime in your head isn't but communicating as an idea is a 'conspiracy to commit a crime' though they this somewhat of a grey area as they still have prove you were communicating about something that if you carried it out would actually be a crime. Anyone else who had contributed to your idea could also be charged as an accessory.

I don't know what your location is, but here it is a crime. Just planning a crime in your head isn't but communicating as an idea is a 'conspiracy to commit a crime' though they this somewhat of a grey area as they still have prove you were communicating about something that if you carried it out would actually be a crime. Anyone else who had contributed to your idea could also be charged as an accessory.

Well that's not good. Because I'm currently writing a novel but I have questions but I don't want to cause any alarms. It is just fiction and nothing more. But I need answers from someone smart in the field of science. A writer needs to do his homework. What options do I have left?

Being a frequent reader of such fiction, I note that many writers give credit to various police, forensic and legal people who've given them information and advice. If you've got questions about forensic or legal or similar matters, I'm pretty sure there are writers' forums who might give you a contact or a link to other resources. Often, writers contact officials or historians or others in the area in which they set the story. A lot of people are very keen to make sure that their town or region is accurately depicted in fiction and they might help you with links to people or resources.

"Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." Winston Churchill"nature is like a game of Jenga; you never know which brick you pull out will cause the whole stack to collapse" Lucy Cooke

In America, you can plan, plot and scheme to your heart's desire due to freedom of speech, and this is a very critical reason why America is the success it has become. Otherwise,

Expressing even the simplest of theoretical ideas would get people into trouble. (Example – Teacher: "The driving distance from NYC to Washington DC is 229 miles. How fast must one drive to travel it in 3 hours?" Student: "77 mph", which is an illegal speed.)

People would not be allowed to "think outside the box" with respect to lawful/unlawful behavior. People could not develop new ideas. (Example – In 1950, to discuss medical facilities where doctors could perform at-will abortions, which were illegal at that time.)

It would make illegal the reporting of a crime to the public because, certainly, the media has, in effect, suggested criminal acts to people who have then committed "copycat crimes".

People could not discuss current events. (Example – It would be illegal to discuss why the 9-11 terrorists bothered with flying lessons, hijacking airliners, and flying them into the Twin Towers when they could have simply driven a truck full of fertilizer into the Wall Street district of NYC and blown it up, which is illegal.)

It would make illegal even obliquely mentioning possible criminal acts (Example – To warn people to shield their fingers when typing their PINs at ATMs, otherwise someone could use binoculars to see their PIN and later mug the person and use their bank card).

It would so severely inhibit expressing illegal (or possibly illegal acts) acts as to significantly inhibit even thinking outside the box because, in being prudent, thinking would be one step away from committing a crime (of communicating a criminal idea). Or, imagine the stigma (even the self-imposed stigma) of thinking about crime.

However, if someone makes a significant step (called an overt act) towards the actual commission of the crime, then, yes, it's conspiracy. So, plan a bank heist with your buddies, but don't go out and buy five black ski masks.

Grief is the price we pay for love. (CM Parkes) Our postillion has been struck by lightning. (Unknown) War is always the choice of the chosen who will not have to fight. (Bono) The years tell much what the days never knew. (RW Emerson) Reality is not always probable, or likely. (JL Borges)

I don't know what your location is, but here it is a crime. Just planning a crime in your head isn't but communicating as an idea is a 'conspiracy to commit a crime' though they this somewhat of a grey area as they still have prove you were communicating about something that if you carried it out would actually be a crime. Anyone else who had contributed to your idea could also be charged as an accessory.

Well that's not good. Because I'm currently writing a novel but I have questions but I don't want to cause any alarms. It is just fiction and nothing more. But I need answers from someone smart in the field of science. A writer needs to do his homework. What options do I have left?

That's why it's a grey area and they have to prove you were talking about an actual crime not just a fictional story, so no need to worry on that one.

How about discussing ways to get rid of a hypothetical body of a murder victim? There is not really a body, but the methodology could be used by a real person looking to commit a real murder. So would that make anyone in the hypothetical discussion guilty of a crime?

I hope not, if so I could see a few film directors on the way to jail. No I would imagine they have prove intent, though that said the is one law of information likely to be of use to a terrorist where they can do anybody. Who has any idea of what may or may of any use to a terrorist? Nuts.

I've seen the disclaimer that mentions the story is fiction and not based on actual fact, any similarity to real persons is coincidental.... blah, blah, blah.

I supposed if something like that was written in to a discussion on how to commit the perfect crime then people would be absolved of any blame in a future copycat type crime.

Still I might be hesitant. Design the perfect crime....What a topic that might be but it probably requires lawyer advice.....or maybe several lawyers before it got started. Mods would probably squash it quickly so no point in trying.

All that belongs to human understanding, in this deep ignorance and obscurity, is to be skeptical, or at least cautious; and not to admit of any hypothesis, whatsoever; much less, of any which is supported by no appearance of probability...Hume

I've seen the disclaimer that mentions the story is fiction and not based on actual fact, any similarity to real persons is coincidental.... blah, blah, blah.

I supposed if something like that was written in to a discussion on how to commit the perfect crime then people would be absolved of any blame in a future copycat type crime.

Still I might be hesitant. Design the perfect crime....What a topic that might be but it probably requires lawyer advice.....or maybe several lawyers before it got started. Mods would probably squash it quickly so no point in trying.

Maybe and maybe not and if you get stopped in one forum there are many other forums that may not see it the same way. I would say give it a try and see what happens.

With all the science around here you'd think as soon as someone mentioned something scientifically foolproof that someone would counter with science that proves it wrong. So on a scientific basis it should be allowed, especially here. If the owner of this forum piped in and said 'no way' then talking about the topic is moot.

However, if someone was to act out a perfectly designed crime then we'd have a victim. Morally I have reservations about starting such a thread because I would feel somewhat responsible if something I contributed to resulted in the harm of another person.

All that belongs to human understanding, in this deep ignorance and obscurity, is to be skeptical, or at least cautious; and not to admit of any hypothesis, whatsoever; much less, of any which is supported by no appearance of probability...Hume

With all the science around here you'd think as soon as someone mentioned something scientifically foolproof that someone would counter with science that proves it wrong. So on a scientific basis it should be allowed, especially here. If the owner of this forum piped in and said 'no way' then talking about the topic is moot.

However, if someone was to act out a perfectly designed crime then we'd have a victim. Morally I have reservations about starting such a thread because I would feel somewhat responsible if something I contributed to resulted in the harm of another person.

If such a crime were to occur. How would it ever be traced back to a forum topic? Even if it were traced back to a topic, do you think you would be made aware of it on a personal level? Think of it this way. How many ideas have the CSI programs made criminals aware of. The plain fact is most murders are not thought out very well, even with all the TV information freely available to all. If you are a criminal and end up killing someone. What are you going to do with the body? If it's a total stranger, you may not have to do anything with the body, but if it's not a stranger but someone you know. That body starts becoming an albatross around your neck, and bodies are not all that easy to deal with.

If such a crime were to occur. How would it ever be traced back to a forum topic? Even if it were traced back to a topic, do you think you would be made aware of it on a personal level? Think of it this way. How many ideas have the CSI programs made criminals aware of.

But that's probably the point.

The CSI producers don't care if they tell potential criminals how to commit a crime, they add that warning in case someone complains that they've taken the poor tragedy that befell Uncle Charlie and made money on it (and portrayed the snotty young nephew — hey, that's me! — as the culprit). I'll sue the bums, but wait, they have a disclaimer that it's not based on any actual event or any actual persons living or dead. Blech!

The operators of forums don't wan't their forums to turn into a meeting place for potential thugs sitting around figuring out how to commit crimes, perfect or not. The same way restaurants — at least all the ones I frequent — don't want mafia types sitting around the tables in the back wearing fedoras, muttering stuff, nodding, winking, gesturing, and so on. It's bad for business, and they're respectable business owners.

Grief is the price we pay for love. (CM Parkes) Our postillion has been struck by lightning. (Unknown) War is always the choice of the chosen who will not have to fight. (Bono) The years tell much what the days never knew. (RW Emerson) Reality is not always probable, or likely. (JL Borges)

If such a crime were to occur. How would it ever be traced back to a forum topic? Even if it were traced back to a topic, do you think you would be made aware of it on a personal level? Think of it this way. How many ideas have the CSI programs made criminals aware of.

But that's probably the point.

The CSI producers don't care if they tell potential criminals how to commit a crime, they add that warning in case someone complains that they've taken the poor tragedy that befell Uncle Charlie and made money on it (and portrayed the snotty young nephew — hey, that's me! — as the culprit). I'll sue the bums, but wait, they have a disclaimer that it's not based on any actual event or any actual persons living or dead. Blech!

The operators of forums don't want their forums to turn into a meeting place for potential thugs sitting around figuring out how to commit crimes, perfect or not. The same way restaurants — at least all the ones I frequent — don't want mafia types sitting around the tables in the back wearing fedoras, muttering stuff, nodding, winking, gesturing, and so on. It's bad for business, and they're respectable business owners.

But forensics is a science and discussing it or any aspect of it seems quite appropriate. So where do you draw the line? I say start the topic and if the Admins want to offer guidelines or direction that's fine.

CSI is so unrealistic that I doubt it offers anything useful to a criminal anymore than watching a Rambo film would help you save a hostage (or fight a futurisic machine...lol).

I found the following article about the CSI effect and some criminals might be able to make use of some of the Info in a CSI program, but most criminals aren't smart enough to really take much advantage of any Info they might get from the show. Also, please read the last sentence that says the show helps them get very qualified people going into the forensic field.

'CSI effect' cuts both ways

From the outside, the L.A. County crime lab looks like a drab, aging office building. But inside, the real life CSI unit looks like a larger, better-lighted version of what you see on TV.

It's full of scientists trying to solve crimes by analyzing everything from bullet fragments to blood samples. We're here to ask about the so-called "CSI effect," the notion that television shows like CSI taint juries and educate criminals, making the job of law enforcement officials more difficult.

Barry Fisher, director of the L.A. County Sheriff's Department crime lab, leads us on a tour. We start in the basement, where a group of crime scene investigators peer through microscopes at bullet fragments.

Fisher says shows like CSI may teach criminals how to cover up evidence, but he thinks investigators will stay one step ahead of them.

"We're not going out of business anytime soon," he says. "It is categorically impossible for someone to get rid of all of the evidence that someone leaves at a crime scene. They can try, but they are not going to succeed in covering it all up."

As we walk from room to room, we see a car bumper from a hit and run case and a suspect's shoe being compared against footprints at a crime scene. Each room has a different function: Fingerprints are in one area, blood and other fluids in another.

Across town, Ray Peavy runs the homicide unit for the L.A. County Sheriff's Department. He thinks criminals are watching crime shows and taking notes.

"Things like cigarette butts, coke cans, beer cans, a sweaty hat band or blood or semen, hairs, all those things that used to be left. Those things are no longer being left at crime scenes," Peavy says.

Police in Austintown, Ohio, say Jermaine McKinney, 26, used bleach to clean up the mess that was left after the killings of Rebecca Cliburn, 45, and her mother Wanda Rollyson, 70, in December. Police say he then burned the bodies to further remove evidence.

According to court papers, McKinney liked to watch "CSI" and other forensic science television shows. Police say he was arrested after he tried using one of the victim's credit cards.

Elizabeth Devine, co-executive director of "CSI Miami," used to work at L.A. County's lab. She left to work as a technical adviser for what was then "CSI Las Vegas." Devine downplays the impact of her television show, or any crime show for that matter, on the criminal justice system.

"It underestimates a little bit the intelligence of our audience, and the American people, to believe they can't tell the difference between a television drama and reality," says Devine.

L.A. County's Fisher thinks that if there is a "CSI effect" it has more to do with how crime shows portray his field than it does with any guidance they may give criminals.

"We are the beneficiaries of that effect, because we are getting some incredibly qualified people who apply for positions over here," he says.

There is no perfect murder or misdeed. Its always imperfect. And if you design a act of misdeed online in a forum. Or discuss acts that's are able to be "twisted" into a crime. IMO its ok to discuss acts or misdeeds. But discussing and acting are two different things. I also think if you act on a discussion, the cops confiscate there computers in a investigation. The information discussed could be used against the individual charged. Its my opinion as well if you wish to try not to get caught you don't discuss anything close to what you are going to do. You stay away from that area. And keep it all to yourself

But forensics is a science and discussing it or any aspect of it seems quite appropriate. So where do you draw the line? I say start the topic and if the Admins want to offer guidelines or direction that's fine.

Planning a murder, even a fictional one, may bring out something psychological that we didn't know we had. However I think we could work our way up to planning a homicide by figuring out a foolproof way of framing someone for a crime they didn't commit. Maybe framing will turn out to be part of a perfect murder scheme. If you can kill then framing someone should be worthy of consideration. I don't know if manipulating a person to do the deed could be worked into the frame but it also might be worth a look.

The plan(s) would obviously have to be good enough to fool law enforcement and science. Can this be done or is it a hare-brained idea to begin with? Should a planner just accept that science will reveal the truth or could science be used to fool other scientists?(I should use that as another topic). Not only that, it might be possible to use psychology to deflect blame away from yourself. What do you think?

All that belongs to human understanding, in this deep ignorance and obscurity, is to be skeptical, or at least cautious; and not to admit of any hypothesis, whatsoever; much less, of any which is supported by no appearance of probability...Hume

But forensics is a science and discussing it or any aspect of it seems quite appropriate. So where do you draw the line? I say start the topic and if the Admins want to offer guidelines or direction that's fine.

Planning a murder, even a fictional one, may bring out something psychological that we didn't know we had. However I think we could work our way up to planning a homicide by figuring out a foolproof way of framing someone for a crime they didn't commit. Maybe framing will turn out to be part of a perfect murder scheme. If you can kill then framing someone should be worthy of consideration. I don't know if manipulating a person to do the deed could be worked into the frame but it also might be worth a look.

The plan(s) would obviously have to be good enough to fool law enforcement and science. Can this be done or is it a hare-brained idea to begin with? Should a planner just accept that science will reveal the truth or could science be used to fool other scientists?(I should use that as another topic). Not only that, it might be possible to use psychology to deflect blame away from yourself. What do you think?

Those themes have been used in both cop and CSI shows. However if you are going to premeditate a murder and your number one objective is not to get caught for it. I'd say take your time and use whatever is available for this particular murder. But keep in mind there's always many things that can go wrong and you will end up caught and if not caught always looking over your shoulder with a bit of paranoia always present.

There is no perfect murder or misdeed. Its always imperfect. And if you design a act of misdeed online in a forum. Or discuss acts that's are able to be "twisted" into a crime. IMO its ok to discuss acts or misdeeds. But discussing and acting are two different things. I also think if you act on a discussion, the cops confiscate there computers in a investigation. The information discussed could be used against the individual charged. Its my opinion as well if you wish to try not to get caught you don't discuss anything close to what you are going to do. You stay away from that area. And keep it all to yourself

There may not be a perfect murder, but there are many unsolved murders that may never be solved. Just because a murder is not solved doesn't mean your life isn't going to get worse because of it.

Those themes have been used in both cop and CSI shows. However if you are going to premeditate a murder and your number one objective is not to get caught for it. I'd say take your time and use whatever is available for this particular murder. But keep in mind there's always many things that can go wrong and you will end up caught and if not caught always looking over your shoulder with a bit of paranoia always present.

I agree that taking time to plan should be the first rule for any criminal not wishing to be caught. I wonder if the chances of committing the perfect crime is proportional to the intelligence of the criminal.

All that belongs to human understanding, in this deep ignorance and obscurity, is to be skeptical, or at least cautious; and not to admit of any hypothesis, whatsoever; much less, of any which is supported by no appearance of probability...Hume

Those themes have been used in both cop and CSI shows. However if you are going to premeditate a murder and your number one objective is not to get caught for it. I'd say take your time and use whatever is available for this particular murder. But keep in mind there's always many things that can go wrong and you will end up caught and if not caught always looking over your shoulder with a bit of paranoia always present.

I agree that taking time to plan should be the first rule for any criminal not wishing to be caught. I wonder if the chances of committing the perfect crime is proportional to the intelligence of the criminal.

That's a statistic that will forever remain hidden, because successful criminals never talk about their crimes. The only ones we have to work with are the ones that get caught and the majority of them are not the brightest kids on the block. I don't necessarily think a crime has to be perfect in order for you not to be caught. Sometimes a little luck and keeping your mouth shut works wonders. The next best thing is never have any witnesses and that includes partners. Having no connection to the victim is also a big plus in not getting caught.

HEY JRMONROE...I LIKE AND AGREE WITH YOUR CONCEPTS RELATED TO "INBOX" THINKING. THIS TYPE OF THINKING, OR SHOULD I SAY LACK OF THINKING, STIFLES PROGRESS AND PREVENTS A CHANGE FOR THE BETTER. "INBOX THINKERS"ARE LIKE THE BLIND LEADING THE BLIND...INTO A DITCH, OR SHOULD I SAY A BOX! THIS HAPPENS IN MANY AREAS STARTING FROM EDUCATION TO CRIMINAL JUSTICE. People would not be allowed to "think outside the box" with respect to lawful/unlawful behavior. People could not develop new ideas. (Example – In 1950, to discuss medical facilities where doctors could perform at-will abortions, which were illegal at that time.) MY QUOTE: IN ORDER TO THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX, ONE MUST FIRST STEP OUT OF THE BOX!

The box... the box... You're obsessed with the box. Maybe you should step out of the box, away from the box and forget abut the box.

I understand your rage. You would be acquitted on this one...... Now pretend you're driving a school bus full of grade school kids with 100 miles to go....this is good therapy.....ready? I'll start...99 bottles of beer on the wall.....

All that belongs to human understanding, in this deep ignorance and obscurity, is to be skeptical, or at least cautious; and not to admit of any hypothesis, whatsoever; much less, of any which is supported by no appearance of probability...Hume

Originally Posted by Neverfly
The box... the box... You're obsessed with the box. Maybe you should step out of the box, away from the box and forget abut the box. Hey Neverfly, I am "out of the box" or else, I would "think" as many persons with brilliant minds do (pherphaps like yours) ... they try to think outside the box while they are still inside it and wind up back in the box!

I understand your rage. You would be acquitted on this one...... Now pretend you're driving a school bus full of grade school kids with 100 miles to go....this is good therapy.....ready? I'll start...99 bottles of beer on the wall.....
zinjanthropos
From eaglepass...a person can be acquitted for a crime for being insane, but not for being fool ....
Mr. Forum Professor:
Where there is smoke there is fire! It would be better for "Neverfly" to "Neverwalk" 100 miles to infinity (in a circle) if he is reacting with anger to the truth of the "boxed-in" metaphor. Rage could very well reflect "denial" of the truth as proposed by the "boxed-in" metaphor. Rage could also be a product of pride, envy, or jealousy against a truth that threatens a person's false sense of power/control. Do you think that Neverfly will admit the truth: that the metaphor quote I have been using applies to him...and perhaps also to other "inboxed" thinkers, especially in the area of mathematics and other subject matter?

Honestly, zinjanthropos, do you really understand Neverfly's rage...if you do, you should recommend anger management treatment...or advice him to "step out of the box" and do some soul searching and thinking relating to the cause of his frustration and the rage you claim you understand.
My Quote: Your conduct and demeanor (rage/arrogance/etc.) will reflect what is in your heart, mind, and soul."

What is sad , to me, is that typically every day somewhere in the world there are mass murders being carried out by some government somewhere that only wants to kill to stay in power. We talk about writing the perfect crime as it is being done right before our eyes daily and yet few do anything to stop this horrendous crime from happening. So as we discuss this type of crime and how to get away with it while millions of humans are being executed, tortured and discared without any recourse to those who perpetrate their wrong doings. Who can have justice anywhere when those without a voice cannot speak?

Last edited by cosmictraveler; January 24th, 2013 at 04:01 PM.

When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace.
Jimi Hendrix

We talk about writing the perfect crime as it is being done right before our eyes daily and yet few do anything to stop this horrendous crime from happening.

I think that the perfect crime would be such that no one would know who did it.

All that belongs to human understanding, in this deep ignorance and obscurity, is to be skeptical, or at least cautious; and not to admit of any hypothesis, whatsoever; much less, of any which is supported by no appearance of probability...Hume

If you wrote about the perfect crime, the perfect crime , becomes, not the perfect crime. You told every one the plot, so the perfect crime can not be......

Naah what a perfect crime is, is when you commit your criminal act openly and publicly but while securing public support for doing so and convincing people that what you did was right and that anyone who disagrees is of a criminal mindset The acquisition of American independence was a criminal act. The signing of the declaration of independence was an act of treason against England and its King whom the residents of the 13 colonies were sworn to remain loyalty to. But they openly and publicly defied the laws and because they fought valiantly and won, the crime was no longer treated as a crime, at least not by the Americans of the day, and eventually even the Brits gave it up.

Not only did this criminal act, sustain no lasting punishment, the act itself became a cause of celebration that even those who were victimized by the crime respect today.